Page:A Collection of Esoteric Writings.djvu/186

172 other hand, nees the same word in the sense it is ordinarily used by English writers. And again, where the lecturer speaks of "the universal reign of law as the expression of the divine will," the Mahatma postulates the existence of "an immutable Law" not depending on any divine will.

But "A Perplexed Reader," writing to Light, says that the Mahatma "has omitted inconvenient words and has so distorted the ideas he has borrowed as to divert them from their original intention to suit his own very different purpose." If there is a difference of words and ideas, where is the offence? Or is it a law of plagiarism thai the person who borrows from another's writings should do so without making the slightest alteration in the passage extracted? If this "Perplexed Reader" were not also a perplexed thinker, he would have seen that these very alterations in the passage in question go very far to show that there was no intention on the Mahatma's part to borrow Mr. Kiddle's inaccurate language and erroneous ideas, and that there is some misconception—some mistake in all this.

IV.It is quite evident from the wording of the passage under examination that there is "something wrong somewhere." Plato is introduced into it rather abruptly and the grammatical construction of the last sentence is by no means clear. Apparently there is no predicate which refers to "ideas larger," &c.

A part of the sentence is thus evidently lost....From the foregoing consideration it will be clearly seen that it could Dot have been the Mahatma's intention to borrow anything from Mr. Kiddle's lecture. On the other hand, the Mahatma's emphatic declaration immediately preceding the passage in question, that Adepts of the "Good Law" do not believe in any other but planetary spirits, his remarks regarding the insufficiency and worthlessness of more physical phenomena in unraveling the mysteries of the noumena world, and his enunciation of the existence of an immutable law in no way subject to the divine will, the existence of which is assnmed by the lecturer—all tend to show that the Mahatma's real